News

Tesla wins approval for new signs

Car company to get exemption for wall sign, monument

Three days after Palo Alto officials approved a large, illuminated sign for the Grocery Outlet store at Alma Village, the city's architectural board granted another sign exemption to a local company whose brand is all too well known.

Tesla Motors secured on Thursday morning the approval of the Architectural Review Board for two signs in its newly opened showroom at 4180 El Camino Real. One would be an illuminated wall sign and another would be a freestanding "monument sign" along El Camino Real.

The board voted 5-0 to approve Tesla's request for two exemptions. Members agreed that one of the exemptions that Tesla requested (pertaining to the size of the wall sign) wasn't even necessary because the aluminum background of the sign would wrap around the existing wall. The real sign, board member Randy Popp said, is the Tesla logo, which would be 32 square feet in size (5 feet 8 inches by 5 feet 8 inches). The entire sign, including the 7-foot-4-inch-wide background, would have an area of 116 square feet.

The freestanding sign, meanwhile, would be neon red and 8 feet 6 inches tall and 4 feet wide. It would feature a Tesla logo constructed of white acrylic and internally illuminated with LEDs, according to a staff report.

The only exemption that the company needed, the board ruled, is the one granting it the right to have two signs. Collectively, they would exceed the allowed 100-square-foot sign area in the sign code.

The board swiftly granted the electric-car giant its wish. Board member Lee Lippert was one of several members to speak in favor of Tesla's proposal, framing the vote as an effort to support local businesses.

"Our community is served well by having an active, busy, prosperous merchants versus an abandoned automobile showroom, which is what we were faced with as soon as three years ago," Lippert said. "When you look at adjacent towns, they're struggling as they're losing their automobile usages."

Posted by Jane
a resident of University South
on Dec 19, 2013 at 10:37 am

The continued adoption of massive buildings, regardless of whether they are glass or traditional, now huge signs, are most definitely changing the feel and traditions of our town - and these few current officials and council members have no right to do that - even after the irate public has made its point with an election.

Posted by Concerned Citizen
a resident of Professorville
on Dec 19, 2013 at 10:40 am

Has Lee Lippert and the rest of the Architectural Review Board ever seen an oversized building or an oversized sign they didn't like? When is an ARB that reflects the tastes of the community and respects the zoning code going to be appointed?

Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 19, 2013 at 11:09 am

As much as this is probably big and ugly, it is better on El Camino rather than anywhere else.

The big problem and one that we have been saying all along, is that the precedent is now set. Of course every store on ECR will want one and very soon ECR will look like Las Vegas. The other aspect of this is that parts of ECR are looking so neglected and dark, this will add to that and then crime and bad guys activities will go hand in glove.

Now is the time for CC to actively spruce up the dark, derelict areas of ECR and I don't mean by doing another Rickeys Hyatt job!

Posted by Double standards
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 19, 2013 at 11:10 am

I'd like to see these kinds of decisions made in the insulated, protected, northeast high-end residential section of Palo Alto that is rarely touched by high-density development, ugly huge signs, disappearing street trees and reduced set-backs. I'd like to see them put a medium density affordable housing project in THAT neighborhood--with big signs and reduced setbacks, 3-stories, and tandem parking.

Posted by SteveU
a resident of Barron Park
on Dec 19, 2013 at 12:20 pmSteveU is a registered user.

There must be a lot of youngsters posting.

Signs were commonly lots bigger in the 60's. (IIRC there were even billboards (like the Freeway) along ECR.) The sign ordinances hit back hard.
Lower, lots lower. (Anyone remember the All American sign on the Poles?)
And way Smaller Too.
Many were grandfathered... Until... they needed a Building permit for 'anything'.

Posted by Smells musk-y here
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 19, 2013 at 12:51 pm

So the ARB violates the rules again, huh? How long is this illicit behavior going to go on? Why are they trying to make Palo Alto look cheap and tacky? What benefit does the ARB get from making themselves look like scofflaws and making this city look cheesy?

[Portion removed.]

BTW, I own a Tesla S, and it is unbelievable how the sale is rigged so that if you want to upgrade anything on the car, before or after-market, you HAVE to buy it through Tesla! Also, no other tires, steering wheels, etc will fit on a Tesla other than Tesla's own brands. To add injury to insult, I am being nickel and domed to death by repairs every 3-4 weeks! I would think Elon Musk would be on debt from all the payouts on his warranties for these unreliable cars!

Posted by suggestion
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 19, 2013 at 1:50 pm

I recommend reading up the raft of legitimate news articles about the proprietor of this company and his dealings with wives, girlfriends, co-CEO's, co-workers, co-investors and etc. to see what this person is like. Breathtaking. I sympathize with the other parties in each case. I assume he makes certain he can get whatever he likes. I would never do business with such a person. Never, never, never. Nor should government officials bend the rules and grant any variances to him.

Posted by Why do we have rules?
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Dec 19, 2013 at 2:35 pm

As Karen Holman said in Council last week: "Can anyone tell me why we have rules. Can you?"

For the majority of Palo Alto Council, Commissions and Staff, our policies and ordinances simply don't matter. They find ways around them that may or may not be legal.

The citizens of Palo Alto must elect new Council Members in 2014 that represent the public. Karen Holman represents the public and is often one of the two or three minority votes to uphold our rules. Vote AGAINST Scharff, Shepherd, Price!

"We are not waiting for the future to make progress as this is the 'year of the future' and the future is now," Scharff told a crowd of more than 100 people who gathered for his speech at electric carmaker Tesla Motors' cavernous headquarters in the Stanford Research Park.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Seems it was the 2013 State of the City Address.

Wonder how many tit-for-tats were traded before Tesla told old "the building is the benefit" Mayor Greg to "come on down"?

Posted by Smells musk-y here
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 19, 2013 at 6:22 pm

@Crescent Park Dad: Consumer Reports rated the car very highly; the salespeople assured us that ALL the bugs had been worked out. Talked to other owners who raved about it. Only NOW that it is proving to be a lemon are other Tesla owners admitting that their cars are in the shop as much or more than they are in it.

@Dan: that's why. I did not buy Apple products until recently. Problem is Tesla withheld a lot of information until the last minute, after we had put down a 50% deposit, our credit checked out and the car was already ordered!

Now, if I. Decide to sell it, I am finding That no other car dealer will take it on a trade-in!!!

Gimme a break. Large signs so these evil fire cars can be promoted and sold to dumb people. Why is Palo Alto standing for this kind of thing. Allowing a company to take advantage or codes and laws to brutally bring site pollution to residents is unfair and ill-conceived. Was someone paid off for this decision? Someone will regret making this special accommodations down the road, and voters will not be kind to the elected official found with his/her hand in the cookie jar.

Posted by Concerned Gunn Parent
a resident of Midtown
on Dec 20, 2013 at 7:12 am

El Camino and Arastadero is a busy commute corridor. I am concerned that the sign will limit visibility or be distracting to commuters in the area.

Its hard enough to go by that corner without wondering what new, exciting car will be out on the lot or in the showrooms. I don't think that a sign is needed in Palo Alto. This seems like visual pollution.

Posted by Deep Throat
a resident of another community
on Dec 20, 2013 at 3:03 pm

"Posted by KP, a resident of South of Midtown
on Dec 19, 2013 at 10:59 am

If the council can approve a huge ugly a$$ sign for Alma Plaza, they BETTER approve one on El Camino!
At least we know Tesla has good looking logo's and signage!"

City staff had to schedule the consideration of the Grocery Outlet sign prior to the Architectural Review Board hearing on the Tesla sign.

If the Tesla sign was approved prior to the meeting about the Grocery Outlet sign, then the City Council would have had to decide whether a discount grocer that has a different customer base than Tesla deserved a larger sign than Tesla got even though Tesla has wealthier customers than Grocery Outlet.

Posted by resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 20, 2013 at 7:35 pm

It's a total visual assault in Palo Alto - the poor commercial sign control
and now exceptions, the ugly buildings, and lastly the unbelievable sign clutter put up by the City in both commercial and residential street corridors, along with yellow and red paint. Every day there is more paint and more signs, making Palo Alto streetscapes the ugliest seen anywhere.

Posted by resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 20, 2013 at 10:10 pm

@Rupert of henzau
I made that comment with consideration. I stand by it. Drive east on
Channing from Waverley to Middlefield. Notice the 6 large Crosswalk
signs on a single block, the Senior Facility sign approaching the Webster intersection, the four flashing lights at the intersection, and the sign in the intersection. This is in a residential area. Tell me where you have seen anything like this anywhere else, domestic or foreign country. I am
not aware of any accident history at that intersection which would prompt
any kind of drastic makeover of the intersection. What the City did not do
is make it a 4-way stop which would probably make it safer than it is now
with all the signs.

Posted by Pants on fire...
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Dec 24, 2013 at 4:06 pm

According to the Post, ARB chairman Lippert said: "We want citizens to come forward and tell us their thoughts and feelings about it." [the Tesla sign]
Mr.Lippert apparently hasn't listened to the people who have spoken to the ARB, to the Planning Commission, and to the Council. And he hasn't read the letters to the editor in all the newspapers or on this Town Square.
So he wants us to let him know what we think.
I think that Mr.Lippert is playing a game with us and we do not like it.

Don't miss out on the discussion!Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online.
Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information
and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.